Conversations of family and primary school groups at robotic dinosaurs in a museum? What do they talk about?
The story from the museum may not be read by visitors, who come with their own knowledge and understanding and read a different story in the animals. The visitors read a story which makes sense to them and builds on what they already know and interests them.
Increasingly, robotics models are being used in natural history museums, science centers, and zoos to attract visitors and tell some kind of story. What do the visitors actually talk about when looking at such robotic animals? The visitors reported on in this paper were primary school groups and families. Do they talk about similar things at the same exhibits, even though the schools visit for educational purposes and the families of their free choice in their leisure time? Furthermore, within school groups, do different subgroups respond in a different way, gauged by the content of their conversations, to similar robotics? This paper studies the conversational content of primary school and family groups at two different robotics dinosaur exhibits in the Natural History Museum, London. One of the exhibits is no longer on display. These verbal responses were analyzed through using a systemic network. Results indicate that visitors commented on a very simple story told through the design of the exhibit and the movements of the specimens. Visitors also noticed the salient features of the animatronics models as reptiles.
KeywordsNatural History Museum Story Line School Group Meat Eater School Visit
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Birney, B. (1988). Criteria for successful museum and zoo visits: Children offer guidance.Curator, 31(4), 292–316.Google Scholar
- Bliss, J., Monk, M., & Ogborn, J. (1983).Qualitative analysis for educational research. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
- Brown, C. A. (with Oliver, A., & Bazley, M.). (1997). Making the most of school visits: Interactions between school helpers and children in a hands-on science gallery.Journal of Education in Museums, 18, 24–25.Google Scholar
- Dale, E. (1954).Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: The Dryden Press.Google Scholar
- Department for Education and Employment (DfEE). (1995).Key stages 1 and 2 of the national curriculum. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
- Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (Eds.). (1985).Children’s ideas in science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
- Kellert, S. (1985). Attitudes towards animals: Age-related development among children.Journal of Environmental Education, 16(3), 29–39.Google Scholar
- Klahr, D. (2000).Exploring science: The cognition and development of the discovery processes. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Lemke, J. (1990).Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
- Marshdoyle, E., Bowman, M. L., & Mullins, G. W. (1982). Evaluating programmatic use of a community resource: The zoo.Journal of Environmental Education, 13(4), 19–26.Google Scholar
- Peart, B. (1984). Impact of exhibit type on knowledge gain, attitudes and behaviour.Curator, 27(3), 220–237.Google Scholar
- Tomkins, S., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2001). Looking for ideas: Observations, interpretation and hypothesis-making by twelve-year-old pupils undertaking science investigations.International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 791–813.Google Scholar
- Tunnicliffe, S. D. (1995).Talking about animals: Studies of young children visiting zoos, a museum, and a farm. Unpublished PhD thesis, King’s College, London.Google Scholar
- Tunnicliffe, S. D. (1996a). Conversations within primary school parties visiting animal specimens in a museum and zoo.Journal of Biological Education, 30(2), 130–141.Google Scholar
- Tunnicliffe, S. D. (1996b). Talking science at animal collections.Primary Science Review, 45, 24–27.Google Scholar
- Watson, J. R., Goldsworthy, A., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1999). What is not fair with investigations.School Science Review, 80(292), 101–106.Google Scholar